Wyoming long range hunting debate

[Jake Larsen]

My opinion on this is split.

If you’re capable at extreme distances, I get it.

For me, wind holds me at 500 yards max.

I truly wonder how many people who are taking shots at extreme ranges are “capable”? How do you define “capable”? To me, it’s something like; “any shot where I truly believe the animal will die when I squeeze the trigger”. For me, that distance is highly dependent on several variables. Range is one, but not the only one.

Regardless, I think it’s a disaster to try to regulate this with laws.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[JohnJohnson]

Idk, I think jailing some idiots and the word getting out might work better than the nothing that is being done right now. Montana estimates that for every 100 ungulates harvested, up to 30 more are wounded that aren't recovered. Animal numbers would be up and tags along with it if people were more ethical by law.

The number of long range rifle hunters is miniscule. If you want to drastically reduce wounding, you get rid of archery, as your screenshot shows. But no one suggests that because if you get close enough, you can't be unethical.

 

[Lee_R]

The number of long range rifle hunters is miniscule. If you want to drastically reduce wounding, you get rid of archery, as your screenshot shows. But no one suggests that because if you get close enough, you can't be unethical.

John, per my original post, I'm going to agree to disagree. After working a gun counter in a montana town (a bigger one) for 3 years, you'd be surprised at the number of clowns that have no trouble launching fmj (or whatever is cheapest) rounds at deer and elk at ranges 500 yds and above. They do not do the practice nor have the equipment to actually do long range hunting...or even call themselves long range hunters, but rest assured many, many so-called hunters do. I'm a life long hunter in my 50s and this job (I took for fun and discounts) has opened my eyes bc it's exposed me to the general population of people who hunt, the vast majority with very different views of hunting, conservation and ethics to me and my friends and family. Case in point, quite a few times per year, guys will claim to hunt after we've bore sighted their rifle without ever shooting it. We have to tell them to do it, they say "yeah right", grab a box of core-locts and leave.

 

[ztc92]

I wonder if Wyoming will add a muzzleloader or primitive weapon season like some other states have done? I’m surprised that it’s just archery (including crossbows) and rifle with no other special/restricted tags or seasons.

 

[JohnJohnson]

After working a gun counter in a montana town (a bigger one) for 3 years, you'd be surprised at the number of clowns that have no trouble launching fmj (or whatever is cheapest) rounds at deer and elk at ranges 500 yds and above

I don't think I'd be horribly surprised, as I work a gun counter as well. My main thought is most of those guys completely miss since they're holding "a few feet over its back" and never come close. The long range hunting wounding rates are pure conjecture right now, whereas we know the general wounding rates of archery. I'm not actually advocating for banning archery. I just think people assess ethical vs unethical based entirely on vibes in a very annoying way.

 

[pacoalcracker]

It's not hard to regulate at all. If you get caught shooting past say 500 yards you better have your long range shooting certificate handy showing you passed a specific long range shooting course as designated or authorized by the state you are hunting in......could be a common course held by many well regarded outfits currently doing it all over the country. Every state has them. No different than a concealed carry permit, drivers license, etc etc., you must qualify in some manner. Most states require a hunters safety course so this could be done in the same manner.

 

[Trimbandit]

Backfire did another one of his videos where good shooters have their hunting rifles in real world scenarios. Those are always eye opening.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

It's not hard to regulate at all. If you get caught shooting past say 500 yards you better have your long range shooting certificate handy showing you passed a specific long range shooting course as designated or authorized by the state you are hunting in......could be a common course held by many well regarded outfits currently doing it all over the country. Every state has them. No different than a concealed carry permit, drivers license, etc etc., you must qualify in some manner. Most states require a hunters safety course so this could be done in the same manner.

Many hunters have no business being in the woods at all. Or being there with a loaded weapon. Much less shooting at a game animal at any range over 50 meters. And that’s with hunter education classes being mandatory almost everywhere. And hunters being drawn from a self-selected body of people who like firearms and shooting. Even a lot of the hunters who can shoot probably shouldn’t be shooting at game animals at anything past MPBR.

Just like many drivers have no business being on the road.

These calls to ban long range hunting almost always rely on a logical fallacy equivalent to “most drivers are terrible, so we need a speed limit of 55 for professional drivers.”

If something is unethical, then it is unethical regardless of skill level.

I think a lot of hunters just like the idea of being able to tell other hunters how to hunt. And don’t care that they are thereby giving non-hunters or anti-hunters authority to tell hunters how to hunt. There’s enough regulations on the books to address these issues (too many regulations really). What is needed is enforcement of the existing regulations and persuasive leadership and guidance. Ron Spomer is a bit of a fudd, but he’s precisely the kind of guy who used to hang out at the game check stations or public shooting ranges to mentor young hunters and shooters.

And a lot more hunters want to erect more barriers to keep other hunters out of the woods and from being successful.

It always bothers me to see those Backfire videos because those are people who are actually at the range trying to get better or at least check their stuff. As a young shooter, there were always old guys at my local public range who would politely give helpful advice. They gently corrected me and helped me learn better ways of doing things than my father (who was an excellent shot, but a poor teacher) had taught me. I always wonder where those guys are at these ranges where Backfire hangs out looking for content to mock.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Steve O]

Gunwerks, a Wyoming company, will be thrilled. So too “Best of the West”. I’m impressed by those who can do it well; it is exactly opposite of but takes the same dedication as traditional bow hunting IMO. Extreme dedication to be effective at either.

 

[BRTreedogs]

John, per my original post, I'm going to agree to disagree. After working a gun counter in a montana town (a bigger one) for 3 years, you'd be surprised at the number of clowns that have no trouble launching fmj (or whatever is cheapest) rounds at deer and elk at ranges 500 yds and above. They do not do the practice nor have the equipment to actually do long range hunting...or even call themselves long range hunters, but rest assured many, many so-called hunters do. I'm a life long hunter in my 50s and this job (I took for fun and discounts) has opened my eyes bc it's exposed me to the general population of people who hunt, the vast majority with very different views of hunting, conservation and ethics to me and my friends and family. Case in point, quite a few times per year, guys will claim to hunt after we've bore sighted their rifle without ever shooting it. We have to tell them to do it, they say "yeah right", grab a box of core-locts and leave.

Just because they shoot doesn’t mean they wound.
I’d bet percentage wise a lot more archers are drawing blood.

 

[Macegl]

I’m not sure this even needs to be a debate on ethics. Hunters who make questionable decisions at long distances will continue to make questionable decisions at shorter distances.

It can potentially be a debate on opportunity. Western game animals are a limited and many times declining resource. Limiting the distance at which they are harvested will most likely result in a lower harvest rate which could allow for more opportunity.

Whether or not more opportunity will be given is another matter entirely.

 

[LongWayAround]

It always bothers me to see those Backfire videos because those are people who are actually at the range trying to get better or at least check their stuff. As a young shooter, there were always old guys at my local public range who would politely give helpful advice. They gently corrected me and helped me learn better ways of doing things than my father (who was an excellent shot, but a poor teacher) had taught me. I always wonder where those guys are at these ranges where Backfire hangs out looking for content to mock.
____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

I don't think that's what's going on there.

He asks those people to participate and they agree. He asks them what their effective range is and they almost all fail to meet that statement. His videos like that one raise the awareness that you're not as good as you think. They are exactly the right people for the occasion.

He even stated that they are very good shooters.

I have seen and heard enough ridiculous advice from random guys that I definitely don't want unsolicited input at a public range.

 

[TaperPin]

It’s human nature for a segment of the population to try shots beyond their abilities and especially young guys have been blasting away without consequences since before Wyoming was a state.

Personally, the range someone shoots at isn’t a problem, but low percentage pot shots are. If it were up to me I’d limit the number of rounds someone can carry to three. Three cartridges for the entire season would be better, but there’s no way to enforce that. It doesn’t take a lot of hunting anywhere from antelope flats to timberline to hear 5 to 10 shots fired at one animal. I heard a dozen shots at Wyoming timberline in the best area of the state one year so I made my way over to see what must be a huge trophy. A dude who hunts coastal black tails saw a young 3x3 and it was the biggest thing he’s ever seen and he wasn’t letting it get away! lol

Skinning game for a butcher, one came in with six holes from pistol bullets and a couple from some kind of low powered rifle. lol

I get the impression fewer people all the time care how far away something is or if they hit it solidly or not. I walked away from a forum when the main guys I otherwise got along with great were patting each other on the back for a first round hit so many feet off it was embarrassing, but the second shot was lucky and killed it. That’s slob hunting if it’s 100 yards or 1000.

 

[UKwildcatfan]

The number of long range rifle hunters is miniscule. If you want to drastically reduce wounding, you get rid of archery, as your screenshot shows. But no one suggests that because if you get close enough, you can't be unethical.

Everyone I run into out west thinks they're a long range hunter with their 28 noslers, 195s, and a 30x scope.
Your archery point is valid. Ran into a NM game warden after an elk rifle hunt in the Gila (he actually pulled me over to check the antlers in my truck). He told me it was estimated there's a 50% wound rate in the Gila by archers. The outfitter I was with had a client wound three before cutting him off. He was going to a one wound rule.

 

[Flyjunky]

The number of long range rifle hunters is miniscule. If you want to drastically reduce wounding, you get rid of archery, as your screenshot shows. But no one suggests that because if you get close enough, you can't be unethical.

I’ve said this in numerous threads on this topic but I would bet a huge sum of money that more animals are wounded at distances less than 300 vs over. Trying to pin a wounding number on long range hunters is absurd. At least with the people I know and shoot with, those that shoot longer distances are practicing way more often, are more familiar with their equipment, and don’t take shots they aren’t comfortable with.

Has anyone been an RO at a range during a public “sight in” day? People shooting 3”-5” groups at 100 are the norm. Most of them haven’t shot 100 rounds through their gun in 5 years.

Long range isn’t the problem, ethics, or lack of, is the problem.

 

[Flyjunky]

John, per my original post, I'm going to agree to disagree. After working a gun counter in a montana town (a bigger one) for 3 years, you'd be surprised at the number of clowns that have no trouble launching fmj (or whatever is cheapest) rounds at deer and elk at ranges 500 yds and above. They do not do the practice nor have the equipment to actually do long range hunting...or even call themselves long range hunters, but rest assured many, many so-called hunters do. I'm a life long hunter in my 50s and this job (I took for fun and discounts) has opened my eyes bc it's exposed me to the general population of people who hunt, the vast majority with very different views of hunting, conservation and ethics to me and my friends and family. Case in point, quite a few times per year, guys will claim to hunt after we've bore sighted their rifle without ever shooting it. We have to tell them to do it, they say "yeah right", grab a box of core-locts and leave.

And a law is going to change what for these types?

 

[Flyjunky]

It's not hard to regulate at all. If you get caught shooting past say 500 yards you better have your long range shooting certificate handy showing you passed a specific long range shooting course as designated or authorized by the state you are hunting in......could be a common course held by many well regarded outfits currently doing it all over the country. Every state has them. No different than a concealed carry permit, drivers license, etc etc., you must qualify in some manner. Most states require a hunters safety course so this could be done in the same manner.

Let’s make everyone take a shooting test if this is the path you think will make any meaningful impact. If you can’t shoot a 2” 3 shot group off a bench at 100, no hunting, go play golf.

 

[TheYukiYama]

This discussion seems to be focused on reducing long range shooting to reduce wound loss due to unethical shots. I think fair chase is more about giving a sporting chance and adding difficulty. This is more similar to banning drones, than archery, because it has the ability to improve success rates too much. As success rates go up, less tags can be issued to achieve same harvest. If there was a way to enforce a distance limitation, I'd be all for it, but I cant think of how that would work. I suppose limiting scopes to a certain magnification may help.

 

[SDHNTR]

I’m far less concerned with how many are purportedly wounded by LR hunting than how many are killed. If you don’t think that more advanced equipment and turrets and ballistic calculators, etc lead to more lethality, you are delusional.

With opportunity shrinking in the west due to popularity, I’m all for anything that limits lethality if it means more opportunity. It’s way too easy to dial and shoot.

Kiss the scopes goodbye for all I care, as long as I get to hunt. It’s seriously too easy with the rifle and scope/ballistics tech we have available to us now. And at the rate we’re going, we are going to out tech ourselves right out of tag availability.

Make Hunting Hard Again!

 

[Flyjunky]

This discussion seems to be focused on reducing long range shooting to reduce wound loss due to unethical shots. I think fair chase is more about giving a sporting chance and adding difficulty. This is more similar to banning drones, than archery, because it has the ability to improve success rates too much. As success rates go up, less tags can be issued to achieve same harvest. If there was a way to enforce a distance limitation, I'd be all for it, but I cant think of how that would work. I suppose limiting scopes to a certain magnification may help.

Fair chase, shall we limit magnification of binocs and spotters as well, or just get rid of them all together? What kind of fair chase is it to locate game from a mile or more and sneak in for a kill? Rangefinders? Mapping software with waypoints, tracks, routes? Where do we draw a line? Technology advances and we adopt it. Look at sites like rokslide, hunters are getting into the woods with more knowledge on tactics, locations, etc than has ever been.

I don’t know where the line is but I get a feeling people are all for a limitation as long as it doesn’t affect the way they hunt.

Btw, @TheYukiYama, this isn’t directed at you.